Russian Entomol. J. 27(2): 203–206 © RUSSIAN ENTOMOLOGICAL JOURNAL, 2018

Two neotype designations (: Papilionidae)

Äâà îáîçíà÷åíèÿ íåîòèïîâ â ðîäå Parnassius (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae)

S.K. Korb Ñ.Ê. Êîðá

Русское Энтомологическое Общество, П.О. 97 Нижний Новгород, RF-603009, Россия. E-mail: [email protected] Russian Entomological Society, Nizhny Novgorod Branch, P.O. Box 97 Nizhny Novgorod, RF-603009, .

KEY WORDS: Parnassius, neotype designations, nomenclature. КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: Parnassius, обозначения неотипов, номенклатура.

ABSTRACT. Two neotypes of Parnassius, namely tion with Parnassius phoebus (Fabricius, 1793), dis- the neotype of Parnassius corybas Fischer de Wald- cussed by Hanus and Thèye [2010] and partially heim, 1823 from “Kamchatka, Esso environs” and the resolved by them by designating a neotype for this neotype of Parnassius nomion Fischer de Waldheim, taxon [Hanus, Thèye, 2013]. The request of Balletto 1823 from “Kiachta”, are designated in the present and Bonelli [2014] to suppress the name P. phoebus paper. The neotype specimens as far as the original by using the plenary power of the International Com- description pictures are figured, their labels are docu- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, was not ap- mented. proved [ICZN, 2017]. Article 75.3 of the Code re- quires that “A neotype is validly designated when РЕЗЮМЕ. Обозначаются два неотипа Parnassius: there is an exceptional need and only when that need Parnassius corybas Fischer de Waldheim, 1823 из is stated expressly.”. In the text below I will show, «Камчатка, окр. пос. Эссо» и Parnassius nomion that the neotype of P. corybas Fischer de Waldheim, Fischer de Waldheim, 1823 из «Кяхта». Приводятся 1823 expressly needed to resolve the situation be- изображения неотипов и их этикеток, а также ори- tween P. phoebus, P. ariadne (Lederer, 1853) and P. гинальные иллюстрации Фишера де Вальдгейма. corybas where is still a mess present after the neotype designation for P. phoebus, and the neotype designa- The genus Parnassius Latreille, 1804 is a group tion of P. nomion Fischer de Waldheim, 1823 is of butterflies with endless interest among collectors: expressly needed because its type locality occupy numerous specimens are preserved in institutional three subspecies of this species and the type locality and private entomological collections. As a result of to resolve this problem can be fixed by only primary this interest we have a huge number of named spe- type designation. cies-group taxa (species, subspecies, local forms, One of the results of Hanus and Thèye work was the morphs, aberrations etc.) which sometimes became a replacement of two Parnassius names, supported by ground for some taxonomical battles [see, for exam- cited Opinion [ICZN, 2017]: the taxon previously ple: Rose, 1995; Korb et al., 2016]. Basically, the known as P. ariadne is now P. phoebus, and the taxon only “progress” within the systematics of this genus which was for a long time listed as P. phoebus is now is in the growing amount of described species-group known under the oldest available name P. corybas. But taxa. The nomenclatural part of work within this the problem was not resolved completely by these two group is still in some kind of ancient stage: not all authors: they designated the neotype of P. phoebus, species have properly designated name-bearing types, but no primary type of P. corybas was selected. quite a lot of infrasubspecific taxa are still regarded The collection of G. Fischer de Waldheim was lost as of subspecific rank without any evidence, etc. The in a fire in Moscow [Lyubarsky, 2009; Anikin et al., situation is so neglected that even at the modern time 2017], no type specimen from this collection survived. some very common species can have unfixed nomen- Parnassius corybas was introduced in the famous clatural issues. One of the most striking examples book “Entomographie de la Russie” [Fischer de Wald- was solved only several years ago and still was not heim, 1823–1824] from “Kamtschatka”. At the same adopted by the majority of lepidopterists and by time and in the same monograph the name Parnassius some “amateur parnassiologists”. I mean the situa- nomion was established with the type locality “Dau-

How to cite this article: Korb S.K. 2018. Two Parnassius neotype designations (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) // Russian Entomol. J. Vol.27. No.2. P.203–206. doi: 10.15298/rusentj.27.2.11 204 S.K. Korb ria”, but the term “Dauria” is quite wide and includes W.[aldheim] and under the names the latter gave to the lands of Buryatia, Transbaikal, Amur region, North them. Thus, for the neotype designations of both taxa and closely located areas, so it is area of at the material from the collection of Eversmann is the least three subspecies of P. nomion at present (nomi- best match. nate, P. nomion dis Groum-Grshimaïlo, 1890 and P. Unfortunately, in the above mentioned collection nomion aurora Bang-Haas, 1933); its type is also lost. only one original Eversmann specimen of P. corybas So, actually both P. corybas and P. nomion required is present, but it is from another locality (“Dauria”). the neotype designation: first one by the reason de- Thus it is unlogic to use this specimen for the neotype scribed above, and the second one by the reason of the designation. I designate here as the neotype of Parnas- clearance of its type locality to place the nominate sius corybas Fischer de Waldheim, 1823 a male spec- subspecies in its correct region. Some of the “Ento- imen from Kamchatka. This specimen has two labels: mographie de la Russie” volumes were prepared by “26.06.1994 Russia | Kamchatka | Esso environs” (white Fischer de Waldheim together with Eversmann which paper, printed), “26.06.1994 Россия | Камчатка | окр. also was in constant entomological exchange with him. пос. Эссо” (white paper, printed) (Figs 1–5); it is So, it is logic to conclude, that Eversmann had seen at preserved in the collection of the Zoological Institute least part of Fischer de Waldheim’s material and, of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St.-Petersburg, possibly, had some specimens from Fischer de Wald- Russia. P. corybas was originally described by Fischer heim in his collection. The collection of Eversmann is de Walheim based on a female specimen, whereas the now deposited in the Zoological Institute of the Rus- proposed neotype is a male because over 95% of all sian Academy of Sciences (St.-Petersburg, Russia), primary types within Parnassius are males and thus it and some part of it is also in the collection of the Kazan is better to have this one as the male too to have better University where it came from Eversmann’s student, base for comparison in future. A.M. Butlerov; according to the data of Bremer [1867: Thus, the type locality of P. corybas after the neo- 4], in this collection must be preserved five specimens type designation is: Russia, Kamchatka, environs of the of P. corybas and four of P. nomion. It is important to settlement Esso, coordinates: 55°552503N, 158° point out, that in the catalogue of E. Eversmann’s 412413E. collection, published by Bremer [op. cit.] both taxa are The situation with P. nomion in the Eversmann listed clearly with the authorship of F.[ischer] d.[e] collection is better. The only one specimen was found

Figs 1–5. Parnassius corybas: 1–2 — neotype male; 3 — neotype labels; 4–5 — original figures from the “Entomographie de la Russie”, pl. 6 (female specimen figured). Рис. 1–5. Parnassius corybas: 1–2 — неотип, самец; 3 — этикетки неотипа; 4–5 — оригинальные иллюстрации из “Entomographie de la Russie”, pl. 6 (изображена самка). Two Parnassius neotype designations 205 by my request in the Zoological Institute of the Russian of Fischer de Waldheim and the idea, that the best chance to Academy of Sciences, but it is the perfect match to the designate right neotypes is to use the Eversmann’s collection; published by Fischer de Waldheim figures of this spe- I am very thankful to him for granting access to some rare cies [1823: pl. 6, figs. 3, 4]; see Figs 6–8, 10 of current literature sources and his data about Eversmann’s Parnas- paper. Two specimens with E. Eversmann labels (“Kiach- sians stored in the collection of Kazan University. ta”) are deposited in the Kazan University collection. I designate here the neotype of Parnassius nomion Fis- References cher de Waldheim, 1823, the male specimen, preserved in the collection of the Zoological Institute of the Rus- Anikin V.V., Sachkov S.A., Zolotuhin V.V. 2017. “Fauna lepi- sian Academy of Sciences. This specimen has five dopterologica Volgo-Uralensis”: from P. Pallas to present days labels: yellow rectangle with no inscripts or inprints, // Proceedings of the Museum Witt Munich. Vol.7. P.3–374. Balletto E., Bonelli S. 2014. Case 3637. Papilio phoebus De Prun- “Onon Anfang | July” (white paper, handwritten, un- ner, 1798: proposed conservation in its accustomed usage by known hand), “Parnassius | nomion” (white paper, hand- suppression of Papilio phoebus Fabricius, 1793 (Insecta, Lep- written, unknown hand), “coll. Acad. | Petrop.” (white idoptera, Papilionidae) // Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. paper, printed), “Bremer 6.” (white paper, handwritten, Vol.71. No.2. P.75–80. E. Eversmann’s hand) (Figs 6–10). Bremer O. 1867. Catalog der Lepidopteren-Sammlung des Profes- sors Dr. Eversmann // Horae Societatis Entomologicae Rossi- Thus, the type locality of P. nomion after the neo- cae. T.5. P.1–23 (this paper has its own pagination and is located type designation is: Russia, Transbaikal, environs of the at the end of the volume, before the plates). Kyakhta city, coordinates: 50°212003N, 106°272003E. Fischer de Waldheim. G. 1823–1824. Entomographie de la Russie. T. 2. Moscow: Typis Augusti Semen. [2] + xx + 264 pp., 40 pls. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. I am very thankful to Dr A.Y. [plates published in 1823, the text after November 1824]. Matov and Dr A.L. Lvovsky (St.-Petersburg, Russia) who Hanus J., Thèye M.-L. 2010. Parnassius phoebus (Fabricius, 1793), a misidentified species (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) // Nachrich- searched the specimens of Parnassius in the Eversmann ten des entomologischen Vereins . N.F. Bd.31. Hf.1/2. collection by my request and prepared their photographs to S.71–84. me. I am very grateful to Dr V.V. Zolotuhin (Ulyanovsk, Hanus J., Thèye M.-L. 2013. Les premiers Parnassius: histoire de Russia) who gave me information about the type specimens leur découverte, de leur description et de l’erreur d’identification

Figs 6–10. Parnassius nomion: 6–7 — neotype male; 8–10 — original figures from the “Entomographie de la Russie”, pl. 6 (male specimen figured); 9 — neotype labels. Рис. 6–10. Parnassius nomion: 6–7 — неотип, самец; 8–10 — оригинальные иллюстрации из “Entomographie de la Russie”, pl. 6 (изображён самец); 9 — этикетки неотипа. 206 S.K. Korb

de Parnassius phoebus (Fabricius, 1793) (Lepidoptera Papil- too many poorly circumscribed subspecies // Nota lepidoptero- ionidae) // Alexanor. T.25. No.6. P.323–354. logical. Vol.39. No.2. P.169–191. ICZN. 2017. Opinion 2382 (Case 3637) — Conservation of the Lyubarsky G.Y. 2009. [The history of the Zoological Museum of the accustomed usage of Papilio phoebus De Prunner, 1798 by Moscow University: ideas, persons, structures.] Moscow: KMK suppression of Papilio phoebus Fabricius, 1793 not approved Scientific Press. 743 p. [In Russian] (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Papilionidae) // Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. Vol.73. No.2–4. P.148–149. Rose K. 1995. Zur Unterarten-Inflation in der Gattung Parnassius Korb S.K., Fric Z.F., Bartonova A. 2016. Phylogeny of Koramius (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) // Nachrichten des entomologis- charltonius (Gray, 1853) (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae): a case of chen Vereins Apollo. N.F. Bd.16. No.2/3. S.243–252.